15: Global Issues

Measuring Stratification

One measure of global stratification compares the quality of life of different countries’ populations. Simple indicators of this are infant mortality rates and life expectancy.

Another way to evaluate stratification is to consider how many people live in poverty, and particularly extreme poverty, which has been defined as needing to survive on less than $2.15 per day (Filmer, Fu & Sanchez-Paramo, 2022). Relative poverty is a state of living where people can afford necessities, but cannot meet their society’s average standard of living. For example, in the US, the experience of living without a car to drive to and from work, without any money for a safety net should a family member fall ill, or without any “extras” beyond just making ends meet, effectively limits participation in society and makes life precarious. On the other hand, contrary to relative poverty, people who live in extreme or absolute poverty lack even the basic necessities, which typically include adequate food, clean water, safe housing, and access to healthcare.

The positive news is that, until the COVID-19 pandemic impacted economies in 2020, the extreme poverty rate had been on a 30-year decline. In 1990, 1 in 3 people lived in extreme poverty, compared to approximately 1 in 10 in 2019 (World Bank, 2022). In 2015, 10.8% of the world’s population lived in extreme poverty. In 2019, that number had dropped an entire percentage point to 8.4%. While this is positive, 8.4% is still equivalent to 648 million people living on less than $2.15 a day. The same year (2019), 23.5% of the world lived on less than $3.65 per day, and 46.7% on less than $6.85 per day (Schoch et al., 2022). Unfortunately, the pandemic ended this trend with an estimated spike in poverty rates of 11% in 2022. Followed by the invasion of Ukraine and climate impacts on the world’s biggest food producers, the goal of ending extreme poverty by 2030 seems unreachable (World Bank, 2022).

As seem in Table \(\PageIndex{1}\). The differences between countries are clear when considering their extreme poverty rates. For the most part, the selected countries show disparities even within countries from the same regions. All data is from 2018 (Hasell et al., 2022).

A third measure of income inequality tries to capture the two dimensions of global stratification — gaps between countries and gaps within countries — by comparing standardized income distributions. Figure \(\PageIndex{1}\) compares income distribution in 16 different countries from different regions of the world based on percentiles. To be in the top 1% of income earners in the United States in 2021, one had to earn $336,953 before taxes (about $140,000 more than in Canada ($193,036)), whereas in Ethiopia one only had to earn about $24,297. This means that top 1% in the U.S. were the highest income earners in the world, while Ethiopia is overall one of the poorest countries in the world. On the other hand, the income gap within Columbia in which the 99th percentile earner earns 192 times more than the 10th percentile earner is much higher than in the U.S. where the 99th percentile earner earns 83 times more than the 10th percentile earner (Mathisen, 2022).

Most people are accustomed to thinking of global stratification as economic inequality. Social inequality, however, is just as harmful as economic discrepancies. Prejudice and discrimination — whether against a certain race, ethnicity, religion, or the like — can create and aggravate conditions of economic equality, both within and between nations. Think about the inequity that existed for decades within the nation of South Africa. Apartheid, one of the most extreme cases of institutionalized and legal racism, created a social inequality that earned it the world’s condemnation. When looking at inequity between states, one can think also about the disregard of the civil war in Yemen by most Western nations (Center for Preventive Action, 2022). Since few citizens of Western nations identified with the impoverished, non-white victims of the resulting humanitarian crisis, there has been little push to provide aid or resolve the conflict.

Gender inequity is another global concern. Women continue to have less access to the labour market (and especially to the most rewarding occupations) in many countries and this exacerbates the gender inequality in earnings and access to positions of power and status (Chancel et al., 2022). Women’s inequality can also be measured in terms of degrees of agency, defined as the “ability to define one’s goals and act on them” (Kabeer, 1999). Women are often at a systematic disadvantage in their ability to make effective choices in a range of spheres, from making decisions at home, deciding what kind of work to do, to choosing whether or when to get married and how many children to have to becoming politically active (World Bank Group, 2014).

Inequalities based on sexual orientation and gender identity also exist around the globe. According to Amnesty International (2012), a number of types of crimes are committed against individuals who do not conform to traditional gender roles or sexual orientations (however those are culturally defined). From culturally sanctioned rape to state-sanctioned executions, the abuses are serious. These legalized and culturally accepted forms of prejudice and discrimination exist everywhere — from the United States to Somalia to Tibet — restricting the freedom of individuals and often putting their lives at risk. As of March 2019, 70 global states continue to criminalize same-sex consensual activity. The death penalty for consensual same-sex sexual acts is imposed in 6 UN member states (Iran, Saudi Arabia, Yemen, Sudan, Somalia, and Nigeria) (Mendos, 2019).

High-Income Nations

The World Bank defines high-income nations as having a gross national income of at least $12,536 per capita. in 2019 (World Bank 2021). (Note that the classifications will always lag by a couple of years so that analysts can evaluate the true income of the nations.) Examples include Belgium, Canada, Japan, Oman, Puerto Rico, and the United States.

High-income countries face two major issues: capital flight and deindustrialization. Capital flight refers to the movement (flight) of capital from one nation to another, as when General Motors automotive company closed U.S. factories in Michigan and opened factories in Mexico.

Deindustrialization, a related issue, occurs as a consequence of capital flight, as no new companies open to replace jobs lost to foreign nations. As expected, global companies move their industrial processes to the places where they can get the most production with the least cost, including the building of infrastructure, training of workers, shipping of goods, and, of course, paying employee wages. This means that as emerging economies create their own industrial zones, global companies see the opportunity for existing infrastructure and much lower costs. Those opportunities lead to businesses closing the factories that provide jobs to the middle class within core nations and moving their industrial production to peripheral and semi-peripheral nations.

In other words, as services are relocated, so are jobs. In the United States, many college-educated people are unable to find work, and those with only a high school diploma are in even worse shape. We have, as a country, outsourced ourselves out of jobs, and not just menial jobs, but white-collar work as well. But before we complain too bitterly, we must look at the culture of consumerism that we embrace. A flat screen television that might have cost $1,000 a few years ago is now $250. That cost savings has to come from somewhere. When consumers seek the lowest possible price, shop at big box stores for the biggest discount they can get, and generally ignore other factors in exchange for low cost, they are building the market for outsourcing. And as the demand is built, the market will ensure it is met, even at the expense of the people who wanted it in the first place.

Middle-Income Nations

The World Bank divides middle-income economies into two categories. Lower middle income areas are those with a GNI per capita of more than $1,036 but less than $4,045. Upper middle income areas are those with A GNI per capita between $4,046 and $12,535. Democratic Republic of Congo, Tunisia, Philippines, El Salvador, and Nepal are are examples of lower-middle-income countries. And Argentina, Mexico, China, Iran, Turkey, and Namibia are examples of upper-middle-income nations (World Bank 2021).

Perhaps the most pressing issue for middle-income nations is the problem of debt accumulation. As the name suggests, debt accumulation is the buildup of external debt, wherein countries borrow money from other nations to fund their expansion or growth goals. As the uncertainties of the global economy make repaying these debts, or even paying the interest on them, more challenging, nations can find themselves in trouble. Once global markets have reduced the value of a country’s goods, it can be very difficult to ever manage the debt burden. Such issues have plagued middle-income countries in Latin America and the Caribbean, as well as East Asian and Pacific nations (Dogruel and Dogruel 2007).

Low-Income Nations

The World Bank defines low-income countries as nations whose per capita GNI was $1,035 per capita or less in 2019. For example, Afghanistan, Ethiopia, and Yemen are considered low-income countries. Low-income economies are primarily found in Asia and Africa (World Bank 2021), where most of the world’s population lives. There are two major challenges that these countries face: women are disproportionately affected by poverty (in a trend toward a global feminization of poverty) and much of the population lives in absolute poverty.

Nations' classifications often change as their economies evolve and, sometimes, when their political positions change. Nepal, Indonesia, and Romania all moved up to a higher status based on improved economies. While Sudan, Algeria, and Sri Lanka moved down a level. A few years ago, Myanmar was a low-income nation, but now it has moved into the middle-income area. With Myanmar's 2021 coup, the massive citizen response, and the military's killing of protesters, its economy may go through a downturn again, returning it to the low-income nation status.

Sweatshops and Student Protests: Who’s Making Your Team Spirit?

Most of us don’t pay too much attention to where our favorite products are made. And certainly when you’re shopping for a college sweatshirt or ball cap to wear to a school football game, you probably don’t turn over the label, check who produced the item, and then research whether or not the company has fair labor practices. But for the members of USAS—United Students Against Sweatshops—that’s exactly what they do. The organization, which was founded in 1997, has waged countless battles against both apparel makers and other multinational corporations that do not meet what USAS considers fair working conditions and wages. USAS also focuses on ensuring safe and non-exploitative conditions as well as improved pay and benefits for campus workers, including dining hall staff, security guards, and adjuncts (USAS 2021).

How do clothes get made, and why are garment workers among the most commonly mistreated? In many cases, large apparel companies—including Nike, Lululemon, H&M, Urban Outfitters (owner of Anthropologie and Free People), Zara, and most other major brands—outsource their manufacturing to factories around the world. The apparel companies negotiate prices and schedules with the local manufacturers, and often push for the lowest possible manufacturing cost and the fastest schedule. In order to keep up with demand and manufacture the clothing at the required cost, the factories may pay their employees less, force them to work longer hours, and may maintain unsafe conditions. All of those tactics are associated with sweatshop practices (Chan 2019). In response to action from organizations like USAS, many apparel companies have undertaken steps to ensure that the factories they use are treating workers properly, but in reality, it is very difficult to know for sure. Often, the brands work through subcontractors and subsidiaries, and may not know exactly which factories are producing their products.

Members of USAS helped form the Worker Rights Consortium (WRC), which monitors working conditions for a wide array of companies and their affiliated factories. WRC conducts regular reviews of worldwide manufacturing facilities and publishes the results. The WRC also studies and reports on overall economic conditions and their effect on employment. For example, in 2020, as the global economy went through a rapid downturn, apparel companies demanded lower prices while they also reduced their orders, which put workers at risk of exploitation or job loss (Karim 2020).

Modernization Theory

The individualistic explanation is called modernization theory (Rostow, 1990). According to this theory, rich nations became wealthy because early on they were able to develop the “correct” beliefs, values, and practices—in short, the correct culture—for trade, industrialization, and rapid economic growth to occur. These cultural traits include a willingness to work hard, to abandon tradition in favor of new ways of thinking and doing things, and to adopt a future orientation rather than one focused on maintaining present conditions. Thus Western European nations began to emerge several centuries ago as economic powers because their populations adopted the kinds of values and practices just listed. In contrast, nations in other parts of the world never became wealthy and remain poor today because they never developed the appropriate values and practices. Instead, they continued to follow traditional beliefs and practices that stymied industrial development and modernization.

Modernization theory has much in common with the culture of poverty theory discussed earlier. It attributes the poverty of poor nations to their failure to develop the “proper” beliefs, values, and practices necessary for economic success both at the beginning of industrialization during the nineteenth century and in the two centuries that have since transpired. Because modernization theory implies that people in poor nations do not have the talent and ability to improve their lot, it may be considered a functionalist explanation of global inequality.

According to modernization theory, low-income countries are affected by their lack of industrialization and can improve their global economic standing through (Armer and Katsillis 2010):

• an adjustment of cultural values and attitudes to work
• industrialization and other forms of economic growth

Critics point out the inherent ethnocentric bias of this theory. It supposes all countries have the same resources and are capable of following the same path. In addition, it assumes that the goal of all countries is to be as “developed” as possible. There is no room within this theory for the possibility that industrialization and technology are not the best goals.

There is, of course, some basis for this assumption. Data show that core nations tend to have lower maternal and child mortality rates, longer life spans, and less absolute poverty. It is also true that in the poorest countries, millions of people die from the lack of clean drinking water and sanitation facilities, which are benefits most of us take for granted. At the same time, the issue is more complex than the numbers might suggest. Cultural equality, history, community, and local traditions are all at risk as modernization pushes into peripheral countries. The challenge, then, is to allow the benefits of modernization while maintaining a cultural sensitivity to what already exists.

Dependency Theory

The structural explanation for global stratification is called dependency theory. Whereas modernization theory attributes global stratification to the “wrong” cultural values and practices in poor nations, dependency theory blames global stratification on the exploitation of these nations by wealthy nations. According to this view, poor nations never got the chance to pursue economic growth because early on they were conquered and colonized by European ones. The European nations stole the poor nations’ resources and either enslaved their populations or used them as cheap labor. They installed their own governments and often prevented the local populace from getting a good education. As a result, the colonized nations were unable to develop a professional and business class that would have enabled them to enter the industrial age and to otherwise develop their economies. Along the way, wealthy nations sold their own goods to colonized nations and forced them to run up enormous debt that continues to mount today.

In today’s world, huge multinational corporations continue to exploit the labor and resources of the poorest nations, say dependency theorists. These corporations run sweatshops in many nations, in which workers toil in inhumane conditions at extremely low wages (Sluiter, 2009). Often the corporations work hand-in-hand with corrupt officials in the poor nations to strengthen their economic stake in the countries.

Wallerstein’s (1979) world systems approach provided a systematic and historical framework for dependency theory.

According to world systems theory as articulated by sociologist Immanuel Wallerstein, core countries are at the top of the global hierarchy. Historically these core nations were imperialist nations, willing to use their power to extract resources, physical and economic, from other nations, and exert political control over them.

Core nations are dominant capitalist countries, highly industrialized, technological, and urbanized. They own most of the world’s capital and technology, and have great control over world trade and economic agreements. The US is an example of a core nation.

Semiperipheral countries (e.g., South Korea, Taiwan, Mexico, Brazil, India, Nigeria, South Africa) generally provide labor and materials to core countries. For example, Mexico provides abundant cheap agricultural labour to the United States and Canada, and supplies goods to the North American market at a rate dictated by U.S. consumers without the labor laws and constitutional protections offered to U.S. workers. They also provide an expanding middle class marketplace for the products of core nations.

Peripheral nations (e.g., most African countries and low income countries in South America) have little industrialization; what they do have often represents the outdated castoffs of core nations, the factories and means of production owned by core nations, or the resources exploited by core nations. Peripheral countries are generally indebted to wealthy nations, and their land and populations are often exploited for the gain of other countries, first as colonies and then as sites for multinational corporations. They typically have unstable governments, poor labor standards and inadequate social programs. They are economically dependent on core nations for jobs, loans, and foreign aid.

Because of this hierarchy, individuals living in core countries generally have higher standards of living than those in semiperipheral or peripheral countries.

At first glance, it seems the dependency theory ignores the formerly low-income nations that are now considered middle-income nations and are on their way to becoming high-income nations and major players in the global economy, such as China. It does not explain how some former colonies like Singapore and Sri Lanka have been able to develop while others in Sub-Saharan Africa have not. This makes it seem as if aspect of modernization theory might be plausible. This again though assumes that becoming like core nations and following that model is, or should be, the goal of every naiton. It also soesn’t necessarly show the whole picture.

China is an interesting case in this regard because since 1978, 800 million people, or approximately half the population have been lifted out of poverty, meaning that China is now an upper-middle-income country (World Bank, 2022b). Yet at the same time, 25% of the population in China live under the $6.85 a day poverty cut-off line for middle-income countries (compared to 0.75% in Canada, adjusted for inflation and for differences in the cost of living) (Hasell et al., 2022). This suggests a disjuncture in people’s standard of living within the same country. In fact, from a critical sociology perspective, it becomes more interesting to examine the way development and underdevelopment occur side by side within the core nations, peripheral nations, and semi-peripheral nations. The idea of “nations” as containers of national economies and the unit of analysis for understanding global inequality might not be the most effective way to analyse the configurations of power, wealth, and poverty in an increasingly globalized world.

The True Cost of a T-Shirt

Most people do not pay too much attention to where their favourite products are made. Certainly, when they are shopping for a cheap T-shirt, they probably do not turn over the label, check who produced the item, and then research whether or not the company has fair labour practices. In fact, it can be extremely difficult to discover where exactly the items people use every day have come from. Nevertheless, the purchase of a T-shirt involves the consumer in a series of social relationships that tie them to the lives and working conditions of people around the world.

On April 24, 2013, the Rana Plaza building in Dhaka, Bangladesh, collapsed killing 1,129 garment workers. The building, like 90% of Dhaka’s 4,000 garment factories, was structurally unsound. News reports soon emerged that the factory owners had ignored ominous warning signs, such as visible cracks in the wall, and had illegally added several stories to the top of the building, creating a weight the building could not bear. Rescue workers struggled for over a week to reach trapped survivors, while hospitals tended to the over 2,500 workers who had escaped, many with severe injuries. Survivors told heart-rending tales of having lost mothers and sisters who had worked in the same factories.

Many of the factories operating in the building were producing apparel for well-known Western brands, such as Walmart, Joe Fresh, and Mango. Garment workers in Bangladesh work under unsafe conditions for as little as $38 a month so that North American consumers can purchase T-shirts in the fashionable colours of the season for as little as $5.

Having been put on the defensive for their overseas sweatshop practices, companies like Loblaw have pledged to improve working conditions in their suppliers’ factories, but compliance has proven difficult to ensure because of the increasingly complex web of globalized production (MacKinnon and Strauss, 2013).

The fair trade movement has pushed back against the hyper-exploitation of global workers and forced stores like Loblaw to try to address the unsafe conditions in garment factories like Rana Plaza. Organizations like the Better Factories Cambodia program inspect garment production regularly in Cambodia, enabling stores like Mountain Equipment Co-op to purchase reports on the factory chains it relies on. After the Rana Plaza disaster, Loblaw signed an Accord of Fire and Building Safety in Bangladesh to try to ensure safety compliance of their suppliers. However, the bigger problem seems to originate with people’s desire to be able to purchase a T-shirt for $5 in the first place.

Global Health Disparities

Global health disparities are evident within the Global North (i.e., first-world or developed countries, which are also the richest countries in the world), yet even the poorest person in the Global North tends to have a longer life expectancy than a person that lives in the Global South (i.e., the world’s developing and least developed countries).

The CIA (2023 estimate) reports that the following countries have the highest and lowest life expectancy rates:

SOURCE: CIA (2023). Life Expectancy at Birth. https://www.cia.gov/the-world-factbo...ancy-at-birth/.

According to the CIA (2023), the United States is number 48 in life expectancy, as the average American lives 80.8 years.

SOURCE: CIA (2023). Life Expectancy at Birth. https://www.cia.gov/the-world-factbo...ancy-at-birth/.

Most of the countries with the lowest life expectancy are located within Africa and South Asia. This is due to a myriad of issues. On one side, it is economic in nature, these countries have some of the lowest gross domestic products (GDPs) in the world. Political considerations can also effect life expectancy. One ramification of the United States leaving Afghanistan was reasserting the complete control of the Taliban. The effects of a Taliban government is a lack of healthcare that has left everyone vulnerable, especially women. Many people are dying due to lack of medicine, as the World Health Organization (WHO) estimates that two-thirds of the Afghan population need some sort of health aid (Abbasi 2022). The population is plagued with not only COVID-19, but they are so malnourished that other conditions, such as measles and diarrhea, are rampant (Abbasi 2022). Economics and politics can also collide, as Afghan health workers can often go for months without being paid.

These kinds of health problems are not just limited to Afghanistan. In the Central African Republic there there are 56 million people waiting to have surgery, and it is estimated that 25 percent of all people under the age of 15 will die due to health problems (African Mission Healthcare 2024). Due to the lack of funding and global financial support, countries such as these, as well as many others see their populations continuously on the brink of one health crisis or another. These countries are also experiencing a great deal of political unrest, which further exacerbates global health inequalities because it makes it difficult to adequately implement international financial assistance that would help keep every citizen healthy.

Theory of Unintended Consequences of Social Action

Sociologist Robert Merton illustrated the theory of unintended consequences of social action by examining how medical advancements can have unintended consequences. The medical community vows to do no harm to anyone, but medical decisions have in fact harmed individuals and sometimes entire communities. Kleinman (2010) provides an example of the smallpox vaccination campaign in India, which resulted in the disease becoming more resistant to the vaccine. There are similar issues within the United States, as there is an overuse of antibiotics which cause a viruses to mutate and become more resistant to antibiotics. This creates so-called superbugs, which include some strands of gonorrhea, urinary tract infections, pneumonia, and skin infections. Due to antibiotics being overly prescribed to people and animals because of its effectiveness, antibiotics have lost the potency in the fight against certain viruses. Due to this, the National Institute of Health now recommends washing hands and sanitizing the areas you come into contact with as a means to prevent the spread of bacteria, rather than taking antibiotics for everything. Scientists are trying to find new ways to combat viral infections without utilizing antibiotics. The problem is, advancements in medicine often come at a price. This is a price that not all communities can afford. Vaccines and antibiotics were developed as a means of helping humanity, but unintentionally they have made some illnesses and medical conditions worse.

Theory of Social Construction of Reality

In the 1960s, Peter Berger and Thomas Luckmann developed the theory of the social construction of reality. This theory asserts that the real world is socially and culturally constructed through our interactions and communications with others. How this is understood in the discussion of health inequality, is that certain viruses and diseases become stigmatized based on country of origin and/or the countries that are most affected. Kleinman (2010) provides the example of the scientifically named H1N1 influeza strain which in the media is popularized as the swine flu epidemic and then associated with its origins in China. Due to the challenges in the geo-political relationship between the U.S. and China, all of a sudden the innocuous H1N1 becomes the much more threatening swine flu.

We have continued to witness this stigma during the COVID-19 pandemic, as the disease was labeled as a Chinese (and in some cases, an Asian) disease. Do to people attributing the spread of COVID-19 to members of the Asian community, this led to a significant growth in hate crimes toward Asians within the United States. In response, on May 20, 2021, President Joe Biden signed S.937 - COVID-19 Hate Crimes Act that was to protect all minority groups and the LGBTQ+ community from harm. Though its protections were aimed broadly, the bill was labeled the anti-Asian hate crimes bill due to 3,800 reported cases of hate crimes against Asian-American and Pacific Islanders.

Legislation does not mean an end to socially-constructed negativity though. In an attack in 2023, in Monterey Park, California eleven people were killed and another nine injured during Chinese New Year celebrations. This development of socially constructed negativity can also include certain medical procedures, such as abortion. From a cultural perspective, abortion is a controversial topic in the United States of America especially in rural areas that tend to lean towards social conservatism, whereas, in Japan, abortion is not controversial at all. This means that due to how abortion is seen culturally, not medically, it becomes less available to those that might need it in the U.S.

Theory of Social Suffering

The third theory, social suffering, explores how social, political, economic, and institutional forces can cause, worsen, or alleviate human suffering. It argues that socioeconomic and sociopolitical forces can actually cause disease or at least exacerbates the spread of disease. For example, poverty causes many people to not have access to medical care, which causes people to die of curable viruses and diseases. In the U.S., we see this often with dental care. Even though dental care costs much less than most medical procedures, dental insurance tends to be more restrictive that causes the co-pay to be much higher. Thus, many Americans neglect their teeth, and their overall health, due to these restrictions. The way the system is set up keeps people from getting the care that they need.

Through the theory of social suffering we can also see that social institutions can be barriers to executing healthcare. Globally, this could large institutions, such as the United Nations, or even non-profit organizations that disburse aid. Within the U.S., the Veterans Administration has harmed veterans due to the bureaucracy that often stands between veterans and the ability to receive care. We can also seen this more generally in the population with health-care bureaucracies who may have to approve certain procedures and/or have policies that patients may have to follow before the care can be executed. We have to remember that pain and suffering effects much more than just the individual. Everyone in the patients’ network experiences the pain and suffering as well. Families and friends are also effected after a family member is diagnosed with a major illness, such as cancer or Alzheimer’s.

Health problems and social problems are so intertwined that it is often difficult to untangle the two. Those who live in impoverished areas have a higher propensity to be malnourished. Malnourishment makes the population more susceptible to disease. However, these areas also tend to be the regions that have inadequate, or non-existent, health infrastructure in place. It is hard to provide medicine when people also need a well-balanced meal on a consistent basis. All the medicine in the world will not help if the population cannot fight off new illnesses in the future. It is very onerous to tackle health problems when the societal issues need to be addressed first. But it is hard to address societal issues when a population is dying from illness.

Political can also either help or hinder access to health care. Governments assert their influence over their citizens through determining the types of services that they will provide. In this case, some countries provide more access to healthcare; whereas, other countries will provide no access. Thus, those with money will be able to see a doctor, as the rest of the population will depend on the benevolence of other countries to provide aid, or receive no aid at all. There are also exceptions to this dichotomy. The U.S. is a wealthy state, however, it primarily depends on private health care companies to service the needs of its population. In this way, wealthy Americans are like the wealthy in poorer countries, those with more money have access to better healthcare. The U.S. also struggles with healthcare inequities based on state. Some states provide more health and social services to their residents than other states. It is a system that favors those with wealth, and highlights that health inequality exists even in the wealthiest countries.

Causes and Impacts of Climate Change

Two dominant types of sociological explanation of these processes include the treadmill of production theory and ecological modernization theory. Proponents of the treadmill of production theory have argued that the capitalist system has prioritized economic growth over social equality and environmental protection. But advocates of ecological modernization theory say that as society modernizes, people will realize the need to protect the environment from the strains of human development.

The latter may seem to be supported by emerging policies to reduce environmental harm in developed nations. However, deeper assessment has revealed that the more developed nations have been able to export the effects of their environmental problems to less developed nations, supporting the treadmill theory. Also, this theory ignores some cultural aspects to climate change, as will be discussed below.

Two Types of Sociological Explanation for Climate Change

Treadmill of Production Theory

• The carrying capacity of the planet is finite.
• Industrialism and development cause ecological and environmental damage.
• Rates of resource extraction is unsustainable.

Ecological Modernization Theory

• Modernization can evolve to find sustainable solutions.
• Possible to increase the productivity of resources.
• Societies will be able to develop while the environment remains viable for the future.

Dealing with climate change is caught up in the underlying power dynamics and self-interest inherent in international relations. Less developed nations have feared international restraints on their efforts to grow economically to meet their own needs, while the more powerful developed nations, which are responsible for 60% of GHG emissions, have refused to curtail their own emissions. Accordingly, the less developed nations have become less willing to make sacrifices on behalf of the environment (Roberts and Parks, 2006).

Consumption patterns have also had direct and indirect impacts on climate change and create a perception of climate injustice, especially when they have been driven by the desire for social status, conspicuous consumption, and leisure that secure one’s position in society (Bell, 2004; Veblen, 1994).

For example, there is the issue of monster trucks and “petro masculinity.”

Ford’s launch of its four-door F-150 pickup truck in the late 1990s allowed families to replace sedans and minivans with vehicles that seemed to have more utility, but it started the trend towards larger, more aggressively styled trucks with 4 door cabs, massive front ends and smaller beds. The dominance of “light” trucks in Canada’s new vehicle sales has increased significantly, with these vehicles representing almost 75% of the total (Bubbers, 2019). Since 1990, the average weight of pickups has increased by 1,256 lbs or 32% (Davis and Boundy, 2020). In 2019, there were 25 models of vans, trucks and SUVs that weighed at least 5,500 pounds, approximately double the weight of a Honda Civic.

Despite the advancements in engine fuel efficiency, the overall emissions from light-duty trucks, including pickups, SUVs, and vans, have more than doubled in Canada since 1990. This increase is primarily due to the sheer increase in the number of light trucks on the roads.

There is a certain irrationality to buying monster trucks, especially given people’s awareness of climate change. The majority of truck owners live in cities where trucks are used for local commutes rather than hauling bales of hay, towing trailers or off-roading. Many consumers choose big trucks because they make them feel safer and less vulnerable on the road, which is ironic because pickups and SUVs account for about a quarter of all collisions with pedestrians and bikes, but nearly half of all the deaths (Edwards and Leonard, 2022).

But the size and styling of trucks is also part of North American truck culture in which trucks serve as important signifiers of race, class and gender identity. Dagget (2018) describes the formation of petro-masculinity as an exaggerated expression of masculinity tied to a backlash against climate change discourse. This manifests as a malicious pride in the burning of fossil fuels, the desire for ever larger and more “aggressive” trucks, climate denial, and even truck-centric “Freedom Convoy” style protests against measures to reduce emissions. In all of this, beleaguered masculine identity is the core component of reaction. It is a species of politicized hypermasculinity which “arises when agents of hegemonic masculinity feel threatened or undermined, thereby needing to inflate, exaggerate, or otherwise distort their traditional masculinity” (Agathangelou and Ling, 2004).

For much of the 20th and 21st centuries the privileges and affluence of the North American way of life was centred around intensive fossil fuel consumption and jobs (mostly white and male) reliant upon fossil fuel systems. While “the planet is telling us that there are limits to human freedom; there are freedoms and political choices we can no longer have” (Burke et al., 2016), extracting and burning fuel has been a core component of white, male breadwinner/provider identity. As irrational as it may be, fossil fuels and monster trucks become potent symbols that represent autonomy, self-sufficiency, and a nostalgia for unconstrained male power. As Dagget (2018) says, “it is no coincidence that white, conservative American men — regardless of class — appear to be among the most vociferous climate deniers, as well as leading fossil fuel proponents in the West.”

The concept of petro-masculinity suggests that cultural and political identities also play into fossil fuel use. These cultural and political identities can override the the ecological modernization theory’s assertion that says renewable energy solutions will simply displace fossil fuels as cost, efficiency, and capacity improve. Fossil fuel use is also driven by powerful forces of nostalgia, desire, anxiety, and beleagured masculine identity, which poses problems for finding consensus on post-carbon energy solutions.

Recently, policies to lower carbon emissions have pushed automakers to redesign their vehicles from fuel to battery power. As a result, monster trucks have also begun to be redesigned as full EV (Electric Vehicle) models. People can have their monster trucks with half the lifetime emissions of comparable gas-powered model (Vermes, 2023). However, it is not clear what effect petrol-masculinity will have on their acceptance in the marketplace.

Climate Justice

Within nations, toxic and polluting industries have been located in the poorer districts, because properties in such locations have been considered less valuable (Roberts and Toffolon-Weiss, 2001). Almost all hazardous waste sites are located in or near neighborhoods and communities that are largely populated by low-income and racialized people. Likewise, between core and peripheral societies, ecologically unequal exchanges occur due to resource plundering (which leaves the plundered nation environmentally damaged while the plundering nation reaps economic benefits) and pollution from the side effects of transnational industrial operations (e.g., oil spills and mercury poisoning that affect the peripheral nations most.) (Jorgenson et al., 2011; Pellow, 2009).

While there is great urgency to address climate change, it needs to be done with the idea of climiate justice in mind. The populations and groups most impacted by climate change have been, are, and will continue to be those who contributed least to the problem, raising questions of fairness. Highly impacted groups tend to be historically marginalized and lack access to resources. The climate justice movement seeks to ensure that the concerns and needs of disproportionately impacted, under-resourced groups are addressed in the fight against climate change. Solutions must not be made on the backs of the disadvantaged – for example, policies made to address climate change that mean decreased access to affordable energy for the poor.

The wealthy live lives of privilege where increased consumption and frequent travel produce the bulk of greenhouse gases globally, and the poor bear the brunt of the climate change impacts. Fossil fuel companies continue to make immense profits that benefit a small percentage of people in the world at the expense of the many, and at particular expense of vulnerable populations such as people of color and other marginalized communities. Moreover, in many countries fossil fuel production and consumption are still subsidised from public funds.

The world has been experiencing rising numbers of climate migrants, and within-country migration is projected to increase to over 200 million by 2050 (Clement et al., 2021). People will be pushed from their land due to rising sea levels and more intense weather events, combined with decreases in availability of potable water and productivity of the land. The World Bank estimates that in the worst-hit areas, nearly 3 percent of the populations of Africa south of the Sahara, South Asia, and Latin America will become climate migrants. Additionally, the state of infectious diseases around the world will worsen due to climate change, and these shifts will outpace the ability of societies to adapt (Mora et al., 2022). All of this stems from the root problem of human-induced greenhouse gas emissions, so devising energy reforms based on justice remains a foundational task to stave off the worst of these projections.

Social Movements and Change

Climate change is a deeply controversial subject, despite decades of scientific research and a high degree of scientific consensus that supports its existence. Out of a data set of 88125 climate-related papers published since 2012, Lynas et al (2021) found 99% consensus that contemporary climate change is human-caused.

Environmental social movements have been effective in changing policy through three actions: policy advocacy, policy research, and opening space for political reforms (IPCC, 2018). There have been indications of an increasing trend toward greater awareness and understanding of climate change. This understanding has included greater concerns over climate change and general support for policies that have addressed the associated problems.

On the other hand, conservative movements and those with neoliberal agendas have largely been blocking climate change policymaking largely by denying the science behind it. One key strategy is to manufacture uncertainty about climate science and undermine scientific reports by claiming inadequacy of evidence and contesting methodologies and analyses, tactics that take advantage of the complexities of scientific investigation. The challenges from conservative challengers have had two aims: (1) to undermine the validity and legitimacy of climate change and (2) to attack the authority and integrity of individuals or other groups of scientists.

Listening to these arguments can make life simpler, and lessen guilt or concern about the issue, which can be a relief. To change can often be time consuming or costly, and sometimes both. For example, sorting through your garbage bin to separate the various recyclable materials takes more time and energy than just throwing it all ‘away’ in the trash. It is more expensive to buy an electric vehicle than a regular gas-guzzling automobile, and it is costly to install a solar photovoltaic energy system onto the roof of a house. This helps makes these arguments popular, as do the cultural issues described above regarding monster trucks.

The renewable energy transition is fundamentally, at its core, a political struggle between current dominant systems of power and privilege and those advocating for new energy systems and a more secure future for all.

The lack of political will is the primary reason why fossil fuel production and consumption have not slowed. While the IPCC, UNEP, and other major world organizations, have called on governments from around the world to limit and decrease fossil fuel production, to place sanctions or a moratorium on explorative drilling for fossil fuels, many countries, states, and cities, are still subsidizing and incentivizing the continued production of fossil fuels, denying tat climate change is cause by humans, and refusing to invest in renewable energy technology.

Fossil fuels are a source of immense profit and political power. The amassment of wealth in fossil fuel extraction and production over many decades has allowed some people to become very powerful. These powerhouse businessmen have for years set up right wing think tanks, schools and non-profit foundations that either directly preach neoliberal thought or fund its dissemination. Big business, big money, and big oil have convinced governments to grant them social and political license to continue to profit from fossil fuel extraction and production. They have created massive and well-coordinated public relations campaigns that try to discredit scientific findings about climate change and financed deceptive efforts to promote false ‘skepticism’, using the same tactics (and specialists) that were employed by the tobacco lobby before (Oreskes & Conway, 2010). A recent analysis indicated that climate change demiers enjoy a 49% higher media visibility compared to expert scientists (Petersen et al., 2019).

Still, the movement advocating for climate justice now spans the globe Divestment from fossil fuel is steadily increasing. Even some politicians are embracing ideas that were once considered fringe, such as US Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez’s inclusion of an ambitious stimulus package that at once addressed climate change as well as economic inequality in her platform — in other words, it strove to achieve climate justice.

Introduction

What is security? Security is defined as the condition of being exempt from peril or threat. Generally speaking, when one hears about security, it can be understood at several different levels.: the individual level (human security), the national level (national security) and the global level (global security). Each level is interrelated, with security at the individual level most dependent on security at the national level and ultimately the global level. The table below briefly describes each level of analysis.

Levels of Analysis in Security Level of Analysis